Case Study: Watson V. Watson
Watson is incorrect because his "promise" had all the parts required to be considered a contract. There was mutual assent because Watson made an offer and Coates accepted it. There was consideration in the forms of the guitar and the money. Nothing seems to be wrong with either individual so they also have capacity. Finally, selling a guitar is a legal thing to do so the contract would have legality. Watson is incorrect because his "promise" had all the parts required to be considered a contract. There was mutual assent because Watson made an offer and Coates accepted it. There was consideration in the forms of the guitar and the money. Nothing seems to be wrong with either individual so they also have capacity. Finally, selling a guitar is